On Thursday 08 January 2004 05:53 am, Gutza wrote:
Arwel Parry wrote:
In message 3FFD1664.3070803@moongate.ro, Gutza gutza-xe8bB7KpE7GhKNWrAYCRhA@public.gmane.org writes
Ray Saintonge wrote:
The last thing that Wiktionary needs is a listing of automated translation. [...] Still, to choose one example and say that there is a 1:1 correspondence between the words of two languages represnts a totally naïve view of language.
What would be wrong with this? What counter-examples do you have in mind?
Well, for example if you were translating to/from Welsh, the word "glas" is normally used to describe the colour of the sky, however it is also used to describe the colour of grass. "Llwyd" usually means "grey" but it also has "bluey" connotations...
Perhaps the most famous example would be "libre" and "gratuit" mapping onto the english "free". I agree with Gutza nonetheless that automation would be a good idea. The overwhelming majority of words can be translated into most languages one-to-one (ie. no ambiguities). This would save us a lot of work. And for the few cases where there are problems, they can be corrected by hand.
Best, Sascha Noyes